8 June 2004
Mary Evans
The Doves' Draft Bill
There's a fair amount of trepidation in the air about the possibility of the government renewing the military draft. This time, with great strides that have been made prohibiting sexual discrimination, the draft would include young women as well as young men between the ages of 18 and 26 years.
HR 163 and S 89 were entered in the House and Senate in January of 2003. When I looked at the actual House bill, I was puzzled. It was introduced by three of the most liberal members of the House: Charles Rangel, John Conyers, and Jim McDermott (who happens to be my congressman). Why would liberal "doves" introduce a measure that would champion the cause of conservative "hawks?" The answer I found is that the bill is good medicine while, at the same time, a bitter pill to swallow.
The bill's title is "Universal National Service Act of 2003" and its purpose is described as providing for "the common defense". However, it differs from what we think of as the military draft in that it describes the two years of service as "a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes." Although there is a section allowing conscientious objection to military service, the exemption doesn't relieve the responsibility for service—even military service. Those who object for religious reasons and whose claim is upheld "shall, when inducted, participate in military service that does not include any combatant training component." It's possible to transfer to civilian service, but only at the discretion of the President.
There's no college deferment this time, either, just one for finishing high school—and that expires at age 20. As mentioned before, this includes young women (it amends the Military Selective Service Act to this effect).
According to Jim Mcdermott's staff, the bill was designed as a way to bring up a dialogue on war issues and to prevent the inequality of military casualty tolls that now predominantly affect lower socio-economic classes. The thinking is, that if members of Congress know that their sons and daughters, grandsons and granddaughters, are obliged to participate in national (read "military") service with no exceptions, they will deliberate far more seriously before allowing the executive branch to rush to war.
A recent headline comes to mind regarding the disparity in U.S. military enrollment between upper and lower classes. It's one about a young man who enlisted so he could get veteran's education benefits, the only chance he would have to go to college. Now he, and countless others who enlisted for the same reasons, are returning as veterans in flag-draped coffins.
I've heard over and over about disproportionate numbers of minorities in the military. It’s true: as of September 2002, Whites made up over 68% of the total U.S. 18 - 44 year old population, yet the military consists of less than 62% Whites for those same ages. Although African Americans added up to less than 13% of the same age group nationally, their military enrollment makes up nearly 22%. (Click here for a breakdown by branch, gender and ethnic group.)
The chicken hawks won't have an easy way out of the next draft, if it arrives. And it looks like draft-dodging doves will have to travel farther than Canada to escape Uncle Sam's tap on the shoulder. In December 2001, Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge and Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs John Manley signed the "Smart Border Declaration." It provides for a pre-clearance of border-crossers—need I say more?
So now the Lefties are beginning to rumble about protesting the draft, but a closer look reveals that this bill didn't originate from right-wing hawks. It's a liberal bill that says it doesn't matter any more who you are or if you can afford to send your children to college or not. This measure would require two years of national service for all of our young people; and, that two years can be extended at the discretion of the President, just as those now serving in Iraq are having their tours extended.
This is a bill Democrats originated. It is so patriotic the Republican majority will have a hard time voting it down, even if they want to do so. If the Bush Administration would tone down its war fever, and mainstream Americans would reduce their post-9/11 xenophobia as well, this bill may never have to come to a vote. However, if, among other things, even the Pope's recent warning about a global Muslin-Christian confrontation has no effect on this administration or Americans, I think we're looking at a draft.
This no-way-out Universal Service Act is, indeed, a bitter pill to swallow. But perhaps it will shock us, as a nation, into realizing how critically ill we are.
(I also asked McDermott's staff if anything is being done about an independent investigation into the Iraqi abuse issue (right now the Pentagon is investigating itself with no outside help!). She said there's some rumblings from both Republicans and Democrats in congress, but to really get the ball rolling citizens should complain to the White House - imagine they're paying a bit more attention in an election year. The phone number is 202-456-1111, fax 202-456-2461 or email Bush : president@whitehouse.gov or Cheney: vice.president@whitehouse.gov.)
Copyright 2004 by Buffalo Report, Inc.